IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0103971.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Ultrasound-Guided Transversus Abdominis Plane Block versus Continuous Wound Infusion for Post-Caesarean Analgesia: A Randomized Trial

Author

Listed:
  • Michel Chandon
  • Agnès Bonnet
  • Yannick Burg
  • Carole Barnichon
  • Véronique DesMesnards-Smaja
  • Brigitte Sitbon
  • Christine Foiret
  • Jean-François Dreyfus
  • Jamil Rahmani
  • Pierre-Antoine Laloë
  • Marc Fischler
  • Morgan Le Guen

Abstract

Objective: To compare the analgesic effect of ultrasound-guided Transversus Abdominis Plane (TAP) block versus Continuous Wound Infusion (CWI) with levobupivacaine after caesarean delivery. Methods: We recruited parturients undergoing elective caesareans for this multicenter study. Following written informed consent, they received a spinal anaesthetic without intrathecal morphine for their caesarean section. The postoperative analgesia was randomized to either a bilateral ultrasound guided TAP block (levobupivicaine = 150 mg) or a CWI through an elastomeric pump for 48 hours (levobupivacaine = 150 mg the first day and 12.5 mg/h thereafter). Every woman received regular analgesics along with oral morphine if required. The primary outcome was comparison of the 48-hour area under the curve (AUC) pain scores. Secondary outcomes included morphine consumption, adverse events, and persistent pain one month postoperatively. Results: Recruitment of 120 women was planned but the study was prematurely terminated due to the occurrence of generalized seizures in one patient of the TAP group. By then, 36 patients with TAP and 29 with CWI had completed the study. AUC of pain at rest and during mobilization were not significantly different: 50 [22.5–80] in TAP versus 50 [27.5–130] in CWI (P = 0.4) and 190 [130–240] versus 160 [112.5–247.5] (P = 0.5), respectively. Morphine consumption (0 [0–20] mg in the TAP group and 10 [0–32.5] mg in the CWI group (P = 0.09)) and persistent pain at one month were similar in both groups (respectively 29.6% and 26.6% (P = 0.73)). Conclusion: In cases of morphine-free spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery, no difference between TAP block and CWI for postoperative analgesia was suggested. TAP block may induce seizures in this specific context. Consequently, such a technique after a caesarean section cannot be recommended. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01151943

Suggested Citation

  • Michel Chandon & Agnès Bonnet & Yannick Burg & Carole Barnichon & Véronique DesMesnards-Smaja & Brigitte Sitbon & Christine Foiret & Jean-François Dreyfus & Jamil Rahmani & Pierre-Antoine Laloë & Marc, 2014. "Ultrasound-Guided Transversus Abdominis Plane Block versus Continuous Wound Infusion for Post-Caesarean Analgesia: A Randomized Trial," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(8), pages 1-6, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0103971
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0103971
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0103971
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0103971&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0103971?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0103971. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.